Who Runs the World ? – Network Analysis Reveals 'Super Entity' of Global Corporate Control

In the first such analysis ever conducted, Swiss economic researchers have conducted a global network analysis of the most powerful transnational corporations (TNCs). Their results have revealed a core of 737 firms with control of 80% of this network, and a “super entity” comprised of 147 corporations that have a controlling interest in 40% of the network’s TNCs.

[Note to the reader: see the very end of this article for a ranking of the top 50 ‘control holders’]

When we hear conspiracy theorist talk about this or that powerful group (or alliance of said groups) “pulling strings” behind the scenes, we tend to dismiss or minimize such claims, even though, deep down, we may suspect that there’s some degree of truth to it, however distorted by the theorists’ slightly paranoid perception of the world. But perhaps our tendency to dismiss such claims as exaggerations (at best) comes from our inability to get even a slight grip on the complexity of global corporate ownership; it’s all too vast and complicated to get any clear sense of the reality.

But now we have the results of a global network analysis (Vitali, Glattfelder, Battiston) that, for the first time, lays bare the “architecture” of the global ownership network. In the paper abstract, the authors state:

“We present the ﬁrst investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We ﬁnd that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure* and that a large portion of control ﬂows to a small tightly-knit core of ﬁnancial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.” [emphasis added]

* This “bow tie” structure is similar to the structure of the WWW (analyzing for most influential/most trafficked websites); see diagram below.

Data from previous studies neither fully supported nor completely disproved the idea that a small handful of powerful corporations dominate much or most of the world’s commerce. The researchers acknowledge previous attempts to analyze such networks, but note that these were limited in scope to national networks which “neglected the structure of control at a global level.”

What was needed, assert the researchers, was a complex network analysis.

“A quantitative investigation is not a trivial task because ﬁrms may exert control over other ﬁrms via a web of direct and indirect ownership relations which extends over many countries. Therefore, a complex network analysis is needed in order to uncover the structure of control and its implications. “

To start their analysis, the researchers began with a list of 43,060 TNCs which were taken from a sample of 30 million “economic actors” contained in the Orbis 2007 database [see end note]. TNCs were identified according to the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) definition of a transnational corporation [see end note]. They next applied a recursive search algorithm which singled out the “network of all the ownership pathways originating from and pointing to these TNCs.”

Bow-tie structure of the largest connected component (LCC) and other connected components (OCC). Each section volume scales logarithmically with the share of its TNCs operating revenue. In parenthesis, percentage of operating revenue and number of TNCs

In terms of the connectivity of the network, the researchers found that it consists of many small connected components, but the largest one (encompassing 3/4 of all nodes) “contains all the top TNCs by economic value, accounting for 94.2% of the total TNC operating revenue.”

Two generalized characteristics were identified:

1] A strongly connected component (SCC), that is, a set of ﬁrms in which every member owns directly and/or indirectly shares in every other member. The emergence of such a structure can be explained as a means of preventing take-overs, reducing transaction costs, risk sharing and increasing trust between “groups of interest.”

and

2] The largest connect[ed] component contains only one dominant, strongly connected component (comprised of 1347 nodes). This network, like the WWW, has a bow tie structure. What’s more, they found that this component, or core, is also very densely connected; on average, members of this core have ties to 20 other members. “Top actors” occupy the center of the bow tie. In fact, a randomly chosen TNC in the core has about 50% chance of also being among the top holders, as compared to, for example, 6% for the “in” section. [emphasis added]

“As a result, about 3/4 of the ownership of ﬁrms in the core remains in the hands of ﬁrms of the core itself. In other words, this is a tightly-knit group of corporations that cumulatively hold the majority share of each other.”

In examining the details of this core, the analysis also showed that only 737 top holders accumulate 80% of the control over the value of all TNCs (in the analyzed network). Further,

“…despite its small size, the core holds collectively a large fraction of the total network control. In detail, nearly 4/10 of the control over the economic value of TNCs in the world is held, via a complicated web of ownership relations, by a group of 147 TNCs in the core, which has almost full control over itself. The top holders within the core can thus be thought of as an economic “super-entity” in the global network of corporations.” [emphasis added]

Concerning the implications of this super entity, the researchers asked two fundamental questions: First, what are the implications for market competition, and, second, what are the implications for economic stability?

Regarding the first question, the authors assert that no matter the origin of the SCC, due to its high degree of TNC network control, “it weakens market competition”.

It is clear just from the history of anti-trust laws in this country (the U.S.) that concentrated ownership stifles free market competition and innovation, reduces over-all employment, and leads to excessive pricing.

Zoom on some major TNCs in the ﬁnancial sector. Some cycles are highlighted. Note: data for this analysis comes from the 2007 Orbis database — prior to the 2008 financial crisis, thus, firms such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Bros. are included.

In regards to the second question, the researchers note that “the existence of such a core in the global market was never documented before and thus, so far, no scientific study demonstrates or excludes that this international ‘super-entity’ has ever acted as a bloc.“

However, there is historical data — such as within the airline, auto and steel industries — supporting this possibility.

“…top holders are at least in the position to exert considerable control, either formally (e.g., voting in shareholder and board meetings) or via informal negotiations.”

Additionally, recent studies (Stiglitz J.E., 2010, Battiston S. et al, 2009) have shown that densely connected ﬁnancial networks are highly susceptible to systemic risk. Despite the fact that such networks may seem robust in good economic times, in times of crisis however, member firms tend to enter ‘distress mode’ simultaneously. This was seen recently in the 2008 (“near”) financial collapse (note: 3/4 of the network core in this analysis are ﬁnancial intermediaries).

Calling their findings “remarkable”, they suggest that because “international data sets as well as methods to handle large networks became available only very recently, [this] may explain how this ﬁnding could go unnoticed for so long.”

While the researchers acknowledge that verifying whether the implications of their findings “hold true for the global economy” is beyond the scope of their current research, they assert that their unprecedented attempt to uncover the structure of corporate control is “a necessary precondition for future investigations.”

The Orbis 2007 marketing databasecomprises about 37 million economic actors, both physical persons and ﬁrms located in 194 countries, and roughly 13 million directed and weighted ownership links (equity relations). This data set is intended to track control relationships rather than patrimonial relationships. Whenever available, the percentage of ownership refers to shares associated with voting rights. Accordingly, we select those companies which hold at least 10% of shares in companies located in more than one country. Overall we obtain a list of 43,060 TNCs located in 116 different countries, with 5675 TNCs quoted in stock markets.

The deﬁnition of TNCs given by the OECD states that they “…comprise companies and other entities established in more than one country and so linked that they may coordinate their operations in various ways…”

This is the ﬁrst time a ranking of economic actors by global control is presented. Notice that many actors belong to the ﬁnancial sector (NACE codes starting with 65,66,67) and many of the names are well-known global players.

The interest of this ranking is not that it exposes unsuspected powerful players. Instead, it shows that many of the top actors belong to the core. This means that they do not carry out their business in isolation but, on the contrary, they are tied together in an extremely entangled web of control. This ﬁnding is extremely important since there was no prior economic theory or empirical evidence regarding whether and how top players are connected.

Shareholders are ranked by network control (according to the threshold model, TM). Columns indicate country, NACE industrial sector code, actor’s position in the bow-tie sections, cumulative network control. Notice that NACE codes starting with 65,66, or 67 belong to the ﬁnancial sector.

About the Author

Michael Ricciardi Michael Ricciardi is a well-published writer of science/nature/technology articles as well as essays, poetry and short fiction. Michael has interviewed dozen of scientists from many scientific fields, including Brain Greene, Paul Steinhardt, Arthur Shapiro, and Nobel Laureate Ilya Progogine (deceased).
Michael was trained as a naturalist and taught natural science on Cape Cod, Mass. from 1986-1991. His first arts grant was for production of the environmental (video) documentary 'The Jones River - A Natural History', 1987-88 (Kingston, Mass.).
Michael is an award winning, internationally screened video artist. Two of his more recent short videos; 'A Time of Water Bountiful' and 'My Name is HAM' (an "imagined memoir" about the first chimp in space), and several other short videos, can be viewed on his website (http://www.chaosmosis.net). He is also the author of the ebook 'Zombies, E.T's, and The Super Entity - A Selection of Most Stimulating Articles' and for Kindle: Artful Survival ~ Creative Options for Chaotic Times

If one would or could do a more in depth investigation of the personnel, especially upper level, one would find that many of these people are Jesuit infiltrators. The Jesuits have infiltrated every institution on earth. Subterfuge is their best feature. You don’t need to be an ordained priest to be a Jesuit. Don’t believe me but do the research yourself.

YouCannotHandleTheTruth

Der Muslimen, der Juden, und der Schwulen, alle antichrist.

JEM

I agree. “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” — 1 John 2:22

“And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.” — 1 John 4:3
Gays might profess Christianity but unless they repent and halt the twisted sexual behavior, they are antichrist. Refusing to follow the commands of God/Jesus, is antichrist.

Awesome blog! Is your theme custom made or did
you download it from somewhere? A design like yours with
a few simple adjustements would really make my blog shine.
Please let me know where you got your theme. Kudos

Now if we look closely at those 147 companies, how many people are directly involved in steering them? I suspect it’s actually less than 1% of US population and they probably know each other quite well. They grew up together, attended the same exclusive schools. Their cousins are married. Their families have been running the world since the dark ages.

What would happen if we all stopped paying any money to these enterprises? We could grow our own food, pedal our own bikes, and care for our neighbors. We don’t need them as much as they need us. Live for the Jubilee!

John

I have been saying and will continue to say that if we stop borrowing money from these sort of people and lived a nurturing and yet independent life form the aforementioned parasites the environment biodiversity etc.will be restored etc. But many need to learn many things. A life style change is needed. Grow and make your own share knowledge and labor and the list goes on.
Most important to remember and tell other people that we the majority have the power, we don’t need them, they need us. Without us they could not exist, so find out who you are dealing with, who their friends are what religion they subscribe to, which politicians they are controlling etc.
Birds of a feather flock together and they are sihtting on us; it is time to stop them thieving of us and sending us to needless wars,and make them pay their taxes.

Because of the common misconceptions we keep encountering – from fierce hostility to belittlement and accusations of spreading conspiracy theories – please find in the following some clarifications about our paper, what it is and what it isn’t, while some of the voiced concerns are addressed:

Michael:
Please accept my apologies. I simply wanted to report the issue of fed snooping on those who would denigrate the bank. I see that you have truncated to article nicely and highlighted the only point that wanted to convey. You assessment of the overall article is about the same as mine. Like you I have little sympathy for the Lib/Paul issues and positions. I am a strong proponent of more regulation of the markets and I certainly am an ENVIRONMENTALIST to the core.
So, thank you for having my back and also the keen perception to have identified the point that I wanted to make.

With best personal regards,
Edward

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

HI Folks

Here’s a rather intriguing video clip from the BBC (some thought it was a hoax by one of the Yes Men).

He doesn’t really offer much new advice, but he may be helping to trigger a run on the stock market in Europe.

http://importantmedia.org/members/zshahan/ Zachary Shahan

thanks, Michael. just saw that myself. & thought of this piece of yours of course 😀

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

Michael:
I caught this earlier today too. They were so scared that they speculated that he was pulling a prank. It’s amazing how people can deny things that they, in their hearts, know is true. Somehow we have to remove these parasites from the body politic.

Michael:
Last evening I posted a link to an e-mail that I received yesterday on the subject of the fed. However, it didn’t actually connect to the story so I have redacted it here (without permission but simply claiming “fair use”) for your readers. It’s a bit scarey, as it makes the claim that the Fed will be “monitoring” everything that it can concerning any criticism of the Fed itself.

Here then is the story:

Whiskey & Gunpowder — The Daily Missive of Laissez Faire Books

The Fed is sick of being bad-mouthed…
…And is preparing to do something about it
We’d just like to point out that it’s not really a bank
More like a civilization-eating giant spider
But you didn’t hear that from us.

Gary Gibson, Saint Paul, Minnesota…

If you feel like you’re being watched while you’re at the Whiskey Bar, that’s because you probably are.

And in the future, it may be a sure thing. “Tyler Durden” at ZeroHedge reports, “the Fed has just entered the counterespionage era and will be monitoring everything written about it anywhere in the world.”

“Our old friends, the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States…in a request for proposals filed to companies that are Fed vendors, is requesting the creation of a ‘Social Listening Platform’ whose function is to ‘gather data from various social media outlets and news sources.'”

Hm.

“It will ‘monitor billions of conversations and generate text analytics based on predefined criteria.’ The Fed’s desired product should be able to ‘determine the sentiment of a speaker or writer with respect to some topic or document’…The solution must be able to gather data from the primary social media platforms — Facebook, Twitter, blogs, forums and YouTube. It should also be able to aggregate data from various media outlets such as: CNN, WSJ, Factiva, etc.’ Most importantly, the Listening Platform should be able to ‘handle crisis situations, continuously monitor conversations and identify and reach out to key bloggers and influencers.'”

[NOTE: comment length edited/abbreviated; see reply comment from the author for an explanation]

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Mr Kerr

Thanks for your newest comment.

After reading it all the way through, I decided to edit it down/abbreviate it, for the following reasons:

1] it is far too long a post.

2] It is a one-sided rant against the Federal Reserve Bank (does not discuss any of the advantages to the Fed, other than noting its “claims”)

3] It is essentially a 2000 word promo for Ron Paul / the Libertarian cause.

4] It offers no citations, other that a book (another promotional ad) by another libertarian author.

5] I do not want this article to become a “super magnet” for conspiracy theories about banks/bankers; if you want just conspiracies, and conspiracy thinking, there are plenty of other websites out there offering them.

6] I do not want my readers to think that I support the Libertarian cause. While I am agreement with SOME libertarian idea (anti-war, legalizing cannabis), for the most part, I find Libertarian politics/beliefs woefully naive, and generally paranoid.

Also, the fundamental idea that the market should be unregulated (including no environmental protection laws) is astoundingly simple-minded and reckless.

This is a NEWS site (mostly, with some editorializing). One has to draw the line.

If any reader wishes to read the entire rant against the Fed, they can goodle search the above quoted passage.

Many worthy and sophisticated comments. Some of which are partially true.
But to go beyond the super network of linked financial institutions to their beating yet invisible heart, pumping its black poison through the arteries of the world, you should be aware of this statement.
“Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet, and serve us as our slaves”.
This charming statement of intent, spoken to a fully receptive and adoring Knesset, was spoken by Menachem Begin, 6th President of the State of Israel.
Jacob Rothschild is the agent through whom this plan is being implemented; the Talmud is its philosophical justification.
Little do the goyim realise the pleasures which lie ahead for them.
I very much enjoyed the comment by Michael R., “Do we want the world to enjoy better lives ? Yes, of course.”
Michael, you are severely deluded if you think that this is the goal. The financial system is simply the mechanism through which the true purpose of The Chosen People is being ineluctably brought to fruition.
And I also enjoyed; “There is a global climate crisis afoot, which needs global cooperation to solve”.
The Sun has recently emerged from the period of its greatest activity for 8000 years. The Sun drives global climate. If you take the trouble to look at said climate over the past 450,000 years, you will see 4 main cycles of identical amplitude and constant frequency. We are presently a degree or two away from the latest point of maximum amplitude, but a truly scientific, as opposed to a hopelessly corrupted and fraudulent IPCC-generated non-consensus on this issue, would indicate that we are presently entering a period of global cooling. This may well last a century. What price therefore, the spraying of the world’s skies, at whatever profit, with megatons of aluminium barium and strontium, which is occurring as we speak ?
Doubt me? Read Peter Taylor’s astonishing synopsis of the evidence in his 2009 work, entitled “Chill”.
When you’ve done that, we can have a proper discussion.

http://importantmedia.org/members/zshahan/ Zachary Shahan

Tim, i appreciate your effort at insightful comments here.

I’m not sure about the actual importance of the first part…

On the second part on global warming, though, i’m sorry to say that you are way off. The Sun has been examined in great detail and is just a small piece of the pie at this time:

Sorry, if only solving the climate crisis were so convenient as conducting shoddy science

http://Web Accountablr FrorAll

Tim has no insightful comments just a shameful regurgitation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion – a fraudulent antisemitic text purporting to describe a Jewish plan for achieving global domination. Amazing how the most persecuted people in the world persecute themselves. What trash!

http://importantmedia.org/members/zshahan/ Zachary Shahan

Thanks for the info/update

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Tim

thanks for your comment.

Unfortunately, we can not have a “proper discussion” on climate change, or global financial dynamics, etc., as your beliefs are too prejudicial and saturated with cliche conspiracies and outright falsehoods. Sadly, you don’t seem to do enough research to generate a balanced view of things (even if the ‘truth’ is an imbalance in distribution).

I doubt that anyone you know, or have read, was present when M. Begin made that, or any, speech. I did anticipate some antisemitic comments to pop up here, but was pleasantly surprised (up until your comment) to find none.
By the way, if you had taken the time to investigate some of these TNCs, you’d find that many of them are not run by “Jewish bankers” , but people of many nationalities and cultural backgrounds. But that is not going to change the mind of anyone who is certain of the truth.

This analysis was not about ethnicity, but about connectivity. That said, some people “connect the dots” without any self-control.

You perpetuate a lie when you say things like: “a hopelessly corrupted and fraudulent IPCC-generated non-consensus on this issue, would indicate that we are presently entering a period of global cooling.”

The four (to date) IPCC reports, are the closest thing climate science has to a “consensus”, being the distillation of the work of thousands of scientists from over 50 nations.

As to your statement — What more egregious example of denial can there be (on this issue)?

As to global cooling….some proxy evidence suggests that we were in a 2000 year period of general cooling (punctuated by two warming periods, and one extreme “mini ice-age’), but which began shifting (i.e., the planet started warming again) in the late 19th century (not coincidentally, a few decades after the start of the Industrial revolution). This has been born out by proxy records (e.g., ice cores, lake bed sediments). Recent studies (most reported here on PS) show that our planet’s average temperature is at its warmest in 120,000 years — since the last interglacial period.

This is not to say that the “White Earth Hypothesis” is utterly false. It is not. It was/is a possible scenario (long term) IF, ultimately, the climate system is dominated by NEGATIVE FEEDBACK processes (or if a global period of intense vulcanism ensued, lasting several years). However, if the Climate system is dominated by POSITIVE FEEDBACK effects — or various climate forcings push the climate into said positive feedback — then we could experience an accelerated greenhouse effect (“run-away hot house” effect).

You mention the sun (which may in fact be shrinking, and is currently at its least active state in a century), but fail to mention Milankovitch cycles (one of which describes the proximity of the Earth to the Sun (orbital eccentricity), another, the axial tilt of the Earth towards the Sun) which, in my opinion, are the long-term/large scale determinants of climate. Currently, only the precession cycle (the third Milankovitch cycle) favors glaciation, according to scientists at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.

Oh, and I am familiar with Taylor’s book. ‘Chill’, but have not read it yet. But tell me — before we have a ‘proper discussion’ — how many scientific papers (on climate science or related studies) have you read in the past 4 years? I’ve read about 150 of them…should I use that as criteria for judging you ‘qualified’ to discuss climate science with me? Hmmm?

Lastly, I’m not sure you realize it but you have managed to conflate this article on Financial control networks with climate change (warming) denialism. This is a bad sign.

http://Web Peggy

I suppose it’s a waste of time to even vote, since the voting machines are even rigged along with the rest of what is supposed to be a democracy.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Hi Peggy

Try not to get too down about it; there are limits to control, as there are to growth.

Some of this may be a natural emergence of a distribution principle.

Check our some of my earlier comments regarding the nature of the “entity’.

and thanks for reading!

http://Web Tom Cahill

Thank you for your article about the TNCs that run the world. To me this is more compelling evidence that the USA has been a corporate dictatorship since at least the coup d’etat of Nov. 22, 1963. Since then faces at the top of government change every four or eight years to maintain the illusion of democracy in the USA. The corporate media is the heart and/or soul of the corporate dictatorship. Edward Bernays, called the “father of public relations,” refers to journalism as the “invisible government.” And he is correct in my view.

Yes, I’m a “conspiracy nut” and with very good reason. I have long believed conspiracy is synonymous with politics and economics.

http://Web Michael R.

Mr. Cahill

Thanks for your comment.

Although I do not subscribe to many conspiracy theories (I see these theories as meta-level tokens for complex web phenomena, but I digress…)….
I can understand where you are coming from.

But, one need not subscribe to such theories anymore (which tend to over-simplify things), when we have ownership network architecture laid bare before us to gaze upon and ponder.

One thing that this study points out is indeed how much more complicated things are “in reality” than our theories.

In the film Roller Ball, in the Book 1984, and many other works of fiction, there is never a number of world dominating corporations as high as 147 (never mind 737)…this number cited as comprising “the entity” is far higher than any previous conspiracy theory; though small compared to the sample size, it is still large.

Consider the degree of complexity that can arise from just a classical three-body system — so much so that its complete behavior is nearly impossible to calculate.

How much more so from a super entity of 147?

addendum: Nature acts upon such entities, as surely as it does upon us. Perhaps the ultimate entity here is the biosphere (or the emerging noosphere) whose principles of complexity invisibly guide (or “attract”) the super entity to its natural state of criticality.

http://Web Charlie

So, you’re saying your results fall right in line with Pareto’s Law… who could’ve imagined?

http://Web Michael R.

Charlie

Thanks for your comment.

Do yo mean the Pareto Principle?

Yes, it is interesting that an almost perfect 80 – 20 ratio exists in the members of the super entity (147) to the members of the SCC (737).

Pareto, btw, was a horticulturist too, and got his inspiration for this ratio of imbalance of distribution from his pea plants (20% of whose pods contained 80% of the peas, which he then applied to land wealth distribution in his native Italy).

Paul Krugman, however, dismisses this 80/20 rule as a fallacy (it’s “comforting”), when in fact, wealth accrues mostly to the top 1% (in the US).

In 2006, I unfortunately located my already privatized Social Security account at Fidelity Investments. It contained approximately $250,000.00 at that time. The money was moved into this account via the International Office at the SSA.

I’ve got over 5300 pages of documents to prove this.

I believe if you’d research a little more, you’ll find that Fidelity Management and Research, LLC has beneficial interests in some of the entities that you list.

Which is why it doesn’t matter who the guy the television says is the real President.Another reason also why they say Ron Paul cannot be President.
The position of President is ceremonial at best.The so called President gets it’s marching orders from the super entity,and the “President’s”job is to convey what the Super Entity’s will is,and the “President”just tells the rabble how it’s going to be as if it was _his_idea.Then he goes on a nice vacation being the lightning rod of the peoples ire.
After the corporations hand their orders to the virtual President,he is the focus of the ire and they all have a good Bwahahahaha

Riding around in one of 30 decoy limo’s while the “President”is in one of the HEAVILY armored ones with his hair turning prematurely grey he gets to eat well,and have top notch accommodations,and free food.
It’s a suck job but the perks are nice.
They laugh at the left right good party bad party politics and the people hoping to elect an alleged conservative/liberal in 4 year that’s always an 8 year span lately of a supposed term.
The people leave heated comments on phony political websites and newspaper sites and get their panties in a bunch.
It is hilarious to watch for the Super Entity and company and they know that they can pretty much get away with murder on steroids now.
We think things are soooo civilized now,but there is human trafficking (slavery)and even whips! Their mad scientists created electronic ones and they work pretty much like the old leather ones,
We can thank the baby boomers who like Khrushchev said would destroy the country for us.
Since the 60’s and do your own thing (Crowley’s Mantra)
look at what 50 years of TV and Doing One’s Own thing has done to the fabric of our society.
Is it any wonder that they think the people are idiots?
We are not the same people we were before the boomers and really deserve what they are doing to us.
Look here,over 7,000 photo’s of American Public Shopping at their WalMarthttp://www.peopleofwalmart.com/
KGB (Rothschild/Rockefellerism) 1980 Subversion
the US completely demoralized and fair game.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fQoGMtE0EY
The Rock music that accelerated the demoralization was a Navy Intel program.http://www.mygen.com/Laurel_Canyon-David_McGowan_report.htm

“Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers
and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt
of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of
sheep against the practice of eating mutton.”
*- Bertrand Russell, “The Impact of Science on Society”, 1953, pg 49-50*
This is why Ron Paul cannot be President,because the office has no power left.
They know the people would expect him to do things which he would not be able to do.
It would be like digging one’s spurs into a horse on a Merry Go Round and expecting it to gallop you home to never never land.
=-)

http://Web Judith Howell

Winged Nut?!

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Pammo

Thanks for you comment.

While you make a few valid points, I think you get a bit carried away with yourself. I do not believe that the Baby Boom generation is responsible for this super entity’s evolution — or any consequent effects arising from it.

I believe it is a natural emergent phenomenon. I am not anti-corporate (nor pro-corporate). I am opposed to the concentration of power/control in a few hands that impacts the lives (on many levels) of much of the world’s population (who are mostly low income, poor, or dependent).

If the Boomers had such power, why are so many seeing their retirement funds being wiped out or cut in half? Why are our politicians talking about cutting SS when so many Boomers (who do vote) are now retiring and in need of said security?

I don’t think scape-goating the Boomers gets us anywhere in this complex web of control.

As to your other comments:

In my opinion, Ron Paul has some good ideas, but they are mixed up with some bad ones; his politics are too ideologically driven to be truly helpful in the long run, or to the worlds’ peoples..

Everyone believes that their politics are what’s best for the world (or at least , for themselves).

But this is not a political blog.

Fortunately, I believe that the emerging global awareness (accelerated by the evolution of the WWW) will, if those forces seeking to control its growth are curtailed, can enable a “working solution”, or at least, point us in the right direction

But that may label me a techno-optimist.

http://Web Andrea Muhrrteyn

Pammo:

I agree with most of your assessment, in the absence of two factors: Peak Oil & NNR (Peak Resources) and extraterrestrial truth.

The powers that be (above corporate elite) can practice their Masonic slave and cannon fodder breeding ruling; only if they can find new planets, and the ability to travel to such planets. In the absence of UFO disclosure (and such UFO disclosure proving to be true, with opportunities for colonising other planets); the powers that be are: FUCKED.

My sister is a highly qualified actuary; working for one of the largest investment banks in London (named above). She is CLUELESS about Peak Oil and Peak Non Renewable Natural Resources. The majority of the elite (except perhaps for the CEO’s, and a few other aware ones) are as CLUELESS as my sister; that their entire economic paradigm is unsustainable and crashing headlong into finite resources.

It shall be upto the corporate elite who are aware of Peak Oil and NNR to make the strategic decisions; if they are able to convince the military to do their bidding, whatever such bidding may be. The military I imagine, are the wild card. They are; I imagine the final decision-makers of the future.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Ms Muhrrteyn

Gosh< i wish you hadn't brought up the damned UFO and Masonic fringe conspiracy stuff….you points about peak oil and NNR are otherwise worthwhile.

http://Web Paul

Your responses to these comments are amazing.

http://Web Frank Costa

American Indian Movement activist, poet, song writer and brilliant orator John Trudell was very succinct 31 years ago at a meeting in La Pena restaurant in Berkeley California in preparation of 1980 The Long Walk for Survival:

“And whatever they can get away with with us (Indians) they are going to do to you. You must understand, the corporations control it all now. They needed you all. They needed your ancestors…so they were tolerant…but they don’t need you as much anymore because they have an entire world that is just waiting to become consumers. So they will sacrifice you. Because they can pick up the market someplace else. But lets try to come to an understanding, we are going to have to rebel against the UNITED STATES Government, and the corporations that own it.”

But I would add (optimist and naturalist that I am), that there are limits to power (as there are to growth)…the “systemic risk” spoken of in the article is an indication of this limitation. Inter-connectivity of ownership seems to be in the best interest of the control network’s members when growth is robust and positive. But, it is this same self-interested inter-connectivity that is the stumbling stone of all power networks, when unforeseen or unintentional effects arise.

The theory I am referencing here is called ‘Self-Organized Criticality’, first propounded by Per Bak and Kan Chen back in the late 1980’s. It is a feature of many natural systems (fault systems in the Earth, ecosystems, etc.) as they naturally evolve in complexity and increase their likelihood of a major critical event (collapse).

I believe that this theory of Self-Organized Criticality in Complex Systems is applicable to global financial systems as well.

One thing that serves as a warnings sign here is the frequency of smaller “perturbations” or minor critical events; as these increase, the possibility of a major critical event increases in probability (like a landslide resulting from a series of smaller, local shifts in montane terrain).

They actually discovered a power law that describes this relationship.

I suspect that their work will warrant a serious second look in the coming years.

http://Web Peter

Nice work.

I thought the same about these small events going to a bigger one, like an earthquake.

The problem with applying this to the financial system is that they have a way out and that is the government that they will go to for compensation, too big too fail, so this system cannot fall on it’s own, it can only fall with the whole society.

I’ll not type anything more, too depressing.

http://Web Michael R.

Peter

Yes, it can get that way, at times (often these days).

As to your point about my application of Criticality Theory…this is a good point, and emphasizes one of the differences between human culture and wild Nature.

What the theorists may have missed (what you indicate) is the role of external forces on said complex systems (which are not isolated, but linked to other systems).

So, in your view (I interpret here), The State acts as one of these external forces that can act to prevent a ‘major critical event” (a collapse, via a bail out). This I can well grok.

Thus also, we “prove” that the Government HAD to step in and bail out the banks to prevent a world-wide crisis.

So, perhaps the questions now becomes: how much criticality (and how do we define this) do we allow in economic systems before externally intervening? Will we always be able to do it in time?

The questions may be moot if we have a wise regulatory framework in place….ah, there’s the rub…

Bill Falberg

When I see policemen actually supporting and assisting in the Occupy movement I hear the first falling pebbles of an impending landslide. I’m hoping a Constitutional Convention can be convened to revoke corporate personhood before the banking monopolies collapse of their own mismanagement; taking us all down with them. Without Constitutional rights to impede the surgical prosecution of financial criminals it might still be possible to un-wind the system, one substantial conviction at a time, and bring it under “civilian” control without too much bloodshed. Yes?

http://Listoffolksrunningtheshow Jerry Emerson

Notable by its absence is the central bank combine which outweighs all other contenders combined.

Will they be cross with you should you mention them? Don’t get in Dutch on my account. I know you are just doing your job.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Mr Emerson

Thanks for your comment and concern

As to the role of the Central Bank (I assume you mean the European Central Bank), I have no direct knowledge here. However, it is not unreasonable to suppose that it s current “austerity” policies (its refusal/reluctance to continue buying EU nations’ debt) is in part influenced by those supra financial interests (who control much of the flow of global capital). From their perspective, why buy risky debt without the possibility of return (short to medium-term)? No doubt those with the financial power to effect change here see only a monetary ‘black hole’.

The debt crisis in Europe may reach a critical point quite soon. Let’s hope that those with the real power and control here (in world financial markets) quickly recognize that the need to prevent a global collapse is greater than their short term capital needs.

http://Web Tom Lowe

I’ve always likened the criminal global corporate gang structure as a SCAB that needs to be scraped off the face of the earth.

http://Web Sol of England

Good job on the research.
I postulate these groups are not the top of the tree, except only in the public perception. This list I see is an exposed layer of something else hiding behind them and that list I postulate is even smaller and exerts more control.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Sol of England

Thanks for the comment.

Ah yes, the entity behind the “super entity”…of course….

http://Web Tom Lowe

Well, when we find out just exactly who the core are, I have a dream that 50,000 closet poles will be sharpened and put to some good use up the wazoos of those corporate counterfeiters.

Every dollar I make as a merchant allows them by current law to print up $30 to lend out to each other to play with. How can anyone compete with that kind of outright cheating??

The Corporate SCAB must go.

http://Web Michael R.

Mr Lowe

thanks for your comment.

I don’t believe, however, that any of the core TNCs have the power or authority to print money (US dollars).

That right goes to the US Treasury. But the treasury can only print money that it has (or has borrowed in the form of credit).

Now, one could argue that this credit lending on behalf of financials to government treasuries (buying of US Treasury securities) is in fact an order (indirectly) to print money….

As to your “30 dollars for every one dollar made”, claim, I believe you are referring to the highest leverage ratio prior to the 2008 collapse (amount borrowed against actual held capital), which was as high as 30 to 1.

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

Michael:
When was the last time you saw a printed note that didn’t say “federal reserve note” on it. The congress abdicated (in a criminal way) it’s RESPONSIBILITY to “coin money and regulate the value thereof”. It’s the fact that a private bank now controls “our money”. The use T bills and Bonds as ‘evidence of a deposit’ and print money with those bills and bonds as ,evidence of a deposit’. Then they lend us back our own money at INTEREST. This is what has allowed all of the financial institutions mentioned to accumulate the cash necessary for them to have developed the “web of influence” that this article exposes. So, you see, BANKS (regardless of the nationality of who owns them) are at the CORE of today’s problems. Namely Peak Oil and Peak Natural Non Renewable Resources and what they are leading to.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Mr Kerr

Thanks for your comment.

I do not disagree with the postulate that “banks are at the core of today’s problems”…In regards to the economy in general, others have made the point that it is a matter of credit, or lending…and so, clearly banks play a central role in this…however, what are today’s problems exactly? Are they all or mostly financial? Certainly, there is a wealth imbalance in the world (some of this may be “organically evolved” via the original centers of wealth); our problems are more than monetary. But I wax philosophic.

Sadly, we are not at peak oil, really. Large oil deposits (though deep under the sea often) are still being discovered (e.g., 400 miles off the coast of Brazil, and about 4 miles down). In any event, I’m not sure how you are relating ‘Peak anything’ to banks being the “core of today’s problems”; you’ll have to explain that more.

Perhaps you mean in terms of directing capital toward industries that exploit these resources…banks are at the core of the problem (e.g., the IMF using carbon credit moneys to invest in carbon intensive industries).

But to your other claims: The simple fact of the matter is, we are a debtor nation (have been since Reagan); we borrow more than we loan out in credit. The T bills and bonds we both sell and buy back represent future value; when someone buys a bond or treasury note, that “evidence of deposit” is treated as money in the bank, as it were. Only then is money printed. Sometimes, money is printed based on an estimate of future yields, revenues, etc., but that is still viewed as “real money”.

Not all the money in our treasury is “ours”. Much of it these days belongs to the Chinese. That is the result of being a debtor nation. WE want more than we can afford. We want to be the only super power, right? Well, that costs us massively, and helps put us massively into debt.

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

Michael:
Thank you for replying to my comment. In reading back over it I can understand why I might have confused you a bit. My brain works faster than my fingers (I’m trying to teach myself to type and at 66 it’s no small task) The point being that many of my thoughts don’t make it onto paper as accurately as I’d like and often get lost.I agree with you that the debt that we owe to foreign banks and individuals is a legitimate debt. However, I contend that the debt owed to the federal reserve is fraudulent and should be repudiated. My understanding is that about 6 trillion is the amount in question. Realize, of course, that we (the govt and the banks) never intended to pay back those legitimate debts in real terms but instead with inflated {read that created out of thin air} dollars. That inflation is a hidden tax on the rest of us and is now eviscerating even the middle class. The poor are simply screwed. If one has no way to increase ones income t=hen they will sink further into poverty almost daily. The ability of banks to indulge in “fractional reserve lending” is another log on the fire of disparate income.The money that that practice produces allows the top one percent to own about 50% of all wealth. This phenomenon has happened many times in the past and has invariably ended
badly.
As to peak oil and how it relates to the banks and debt is a subject of, as you note, some dispute. What is true is that all of the easily recoverable oil is past peak and the oil that you refer to along with the tar sands in Alberta and China are going to be almost impossible to recover or will leave a large environmental scar. The down side to that oil is that it will cost a lot to bring to a market that is loosing it’s ability to afford it. Oil is a diminishing resource and the wars of recent years show what governments will do to “keep the oil flowing”. Of course, banks profit handsomely in times of war. It is, I contend, the Plutarch who run this country that own banks along with other large corporations who mainly profit from this situation. When money is “earned” at the cost of human life it is no longer is wealth but rather becomes illth. They are simply a parasite on the body politic and we need to understand that and somehow reverse the situation.None the less, I applaud the work that went into the post and your efforts to bring it to the attention of the small group of folks who are interested and care. So. I agree that our problems are more than simply financial as I also wax philosophic.
Population out of control due to the easy energy (oil) that has allowed us to feed, clothe and house them is another integral problem in this paradigm. No one wants to go back to 1850 so we will need to find a way to power a world where oil and coal cannot continue to be used regardless of how mush is or is not remaining. Climate change (a hotly debated issue among the less informed) is the elephant in the room and banks along with the other vested interests also play a big role in determining how difficult or easy the transition will be. In terms of the continuation of civilization as we know it, a change in our energy and banking paradigms is essential. Sadly, we may already be too late to avoid the consequences of inaction on both of these fronts. Only time will tell. The political situation also needs to change but I haven’t a clue as to how we might accomplish that Herculean task.
Thanks again,
Edward Kerr

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Mr Kerr

I like the neologism “illth” as used in you comment.

I could take or find some exceptions to some of you points, but in general, they are well put, and I tend to sympathize with your views. (although, I would argue that disease control and prevention, and better nutrition, is responsible for the global population boom, not oil, but alas food/water security now becomes the central issue).

There is one contingency in what you say (perhaps lending some hope of sorts): the insurance companies (many of which own the banks that we speak of). How is this relevant?

Insurance corporations are always looking ahead to future insurance risks, and, more and more, they are coming to realize that impacts from Climate Change (and global warming) represent MAJOR and MULTIPLE insurance risks/crises…which will mean massive payouts or, refusals to insure (adding travesty to catastrophe). Thus, if nations and landowners want some protection from these impacts, the insurance companies will start demanding compliance to GHG capping protocols, better land management practices (less land use conversion) protection and restoration of ecosystems, etc. to buffer the predicted impacts.

Think this is mere speculation? It is already starting to happen (look for a future article on this topic here on Planetsave). It would be ironic if real progress on climate change mitigation commenced in seriousness only after the Insurance Industry started “turning the screws” on the would-be-insured, global property owners.

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

Michael:

I hadn’t considered insurance companys as a factor in the equation. My bet is that they will make premiums so high that most people will be unable to afford them. And,of course, they just might opt to not pay and seek bankruptcy protection. As I write premiums in “tornado alley” have already risen. Sadly, by the time they might try to “turn the screws” as you say, it will be too late to matter. I suspect that we have already past the point where mitigation would be effective. I can’t see any chance that CO2 emissions will be curtailed any time soon and the atmosphere has already been altered to the point of causing a change the PH of the ocean. The atmosphere and the oceans have “no respect” for humans. They care not about your gender, nationality, political bent, IQ, looks, wealth or lack of, or what you like to eat. Like gravity they will react to what we have done without mercy. They also don’t recognize borders so what we do here affects what happens there.(where ever there happens to be).

Finally, the reason that I attributed population growth to oil is that it is the energy derived from oil that has allowed us to feed more people and develop the where with all to control and prevent disease. Your note that it is now reduced to food and water security is “spot on”.

I look forward to you next article and to what I’m certain will be incisive thoughts.

Peace
Edward

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Edward

Perhaps I over-estimate the role tht insurance companies will play in CO2/GHG emission compliance/reduction…but “someone has to pay for this”…and if insurance companies declare bankruptcy due to massive climate change payouts, this, I believe will force the government’s (in whatever nation) hand to cover all costs, which will mean either higher taxes or stricter regulations controlling emissions and other industrial activities that harm ecosystems.

Ok,, some would argue that this is where we are heading now, but if we can assume a bit of corporate greed here; that companies want to stay in business to keep making profits, then, as climate change claims start to mount, and payouts too, we may see the Insurance folks lobbying congress to tighten environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act.

Based upon a recent study (covered here on PS), carbon emission are increasing, so, your pessimism may be justified. I can’t afford the pessimism as I write for a blog called ‘Planetsave’

cheers, MR

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

Michael:

With my tongue firmly planted in my cheek, I think that it’s safe to assume that “corporate greed” will outlive Methuselah. However,it’s possible that things could go south much faster that even the most pessimistic among us can envision. My concern is with Methane. At the pole it is higher than in the last 400,000 years. This is most worrisome as continued arctic warming could cause a massive release of the mega amount trapped in the permafrost causing a DRAMATIC change in climate. If that were to occur there will be NO government or insurance co that could make anything right. The last time that it happened it caused a MASS EXTINCTION (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane)

We learned after Katrina that the veneer of civilization is about 4 days thick. That is also troublesome. While it’s impossible, at this time, to accurately predict what will actually happen, the possibilities are disconcerting. I can see a major re-adjustment of the worlds population. And like the air and water that envelop it, the earth could care less.

I have 8 grandchildren and I’m concerned for them and your progeny too. That’s why I get so distraught when I have to deal with the morons who can’t see past the next quarters profits or give a hoot about anyone but themselves. Sadly many of them have gravitated to politics.

But, like you I write on my blog in the hope that we can save the planet. (actually the planet will survive regardless of what we do to ourselves) So maybe we need to think “people-save”

The large number of banks and mutual funds raises the question of whether the underlying entity database distinguishes beneficial from agentive ownership. For example, Vanguard is #8 on the list but is a mutual fund organization, and one that focuses largely on index funds at that. If anything, they avoid active involvement in the direction and management of companies whose stock they hold. While this mostly passive arrangement can work to the benefit of management (taking large blocks of shares out of active involvement in corporate governance), it also tends to suggest that Vanguard’s role in the strongly connected core is also passive. Similarly, large banker/trader organizations frequently have large holdings in street names – they don’t actually own the stocks, they’re on the paperwork as a convenience to facilitate trading.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Bob

Thanks for your detailed comment.

These are interesting, if more nuanced points.

From my reading of the paper, no distinction (qualitative) was made between “beneficial” and “agentive” ownership.

For sure, there are different types of ownership (stakes) between the analyzed TNCs. The authors state that they defined “ownership” as having 10% or more “controlling interest” in one or more TNC’s doing business in at least two countries, etc. Later, they acknowledge that their analysis does not “prove” any controlling activity, per se, but rather, that said control holders have the power to exert control (through several means), if they chose to…so, there’s a potential, if not actual, controlling force in the activity of other TNC’s in the SCC, and beyond.

Your point about Vanguard is well-taken…but I would note that, such a large proportion of capital investment (in index funds, e.g.), if it were pulled from said funds, can have a major consequence in that (index fund) market, and thus potentially produce a wave of “pull outs” from other like or related indexes, etc. That said, it is clear that capital always wants more capital, and any single pull out in a given fund, could simply mean a transfer of said capital to other funds…winners and losers, as it were…Still a control move, or power play.

So, while I would concur with your “passive role” observation, to a degree, I would suggest that this passive role is only by choice (motivated by other factors), and can be changed if market forces, or TNC activity/moves, were to somehow change and motivate some exercise in TNC control, however indirect.

As to your last point, I am not entirely clear on this. What are the “large holdings” that these putative large banker/trader organizations possess? If not stocks (equity shares, etc.)…then what are they — properties, equipment, natural resources (private)?

It would be interesting to pick one of these non-stock holding entities and trace just what exactly they do own, that gives them a “place at the table”, or a central position in the bow tie. (i.e., the SCC)

William Falberg

I think Bob is looking at the bigger picture when he isolates the nature of particular corporate entities in regard to their effect on the larger economy of both corporate and personal businesses. Though corporations constitute the majority of financial interests, there is yet a larger class – the whole system of trade. Banks are targeted because they’re the biggest of the big; but corporate charters, as a business model, dominate industrial, agricultural, and energy commerce as well as bankng behavior so I think it’s the corporate *model* that needs further examination. Irresponsibilty is inherent to corporate charters and distortions are a natural by-product. I think, therefore, that ALL corporate charters need to be written with the same attention to detail as the Constitution itself. Global corporations will be nearly impossible to re-charter or un-charter realistically but Occupy is a good place to start a global movement to restore national sovereighties world-wide. Eternal optimist, I am.

This link is to ALEC’s basket of proposed environmental bills to gut the EPA.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Thank you Virginia!

This was/is unknown to me; an important bit of information to be aware of…I can only wonder how many other “legislative councils” there are out there, or underway.

This full-on attack of the EPA is amazing to behold (and considering how impotent the EPA was under the former admin).

The attack seems to be based upon an old, but unproven/disputed notion that environmental laws hurt or “kill” jobs (which of course, are being “provided” by the most polluting corporate players).

I will be researching the actual cost-benefit impact of enviro regs on business (in general) in an up-coming article.

http://Web Doug Klingenberg

As territorial United States economy and people struggle the US corporations are showing record revenues and profits. We are pawns for the wars over resources for the rich and political as we continue to let our sons die and they (the politicians) “play us “average joe’s” against each other with their Conservative versus Liberal bs (really a (1) party system controlled by the corporations and wall street).
We are no longer needed since the market has extended to a global scale (they can sell product anywhere), yet we continue to buy into some perverse “moralistic” ideal of patriotism and hierarchy, thinking somehow they will do for us what is right?! They shipped off our jobs and aren’t in any hurry to innovate. They are gutting necessary environmental standards so they can extract the last bits of antiquated and non-sustainable resources (fossil fuels) while promising what amounts to maybe a hand-full of jobs?!
Wake the f— up people… and stop (literally) buying into this load of crap…

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Doug

Thanks for your comment.

Although I make little if any political commentary in my post, I do agree on some of your points. To wit:

Over the past 2 years or so, I began wondering why the U.S. private sector (the corporate sphere in general) seems so indifferent to the exporting of manufacturing jobs, the decline in wages/employment, the decline of the middle class (and the union membership that built this class, post WW II)…when these US workers are responsible (largely) for the amassed wealth of these companies and corporations…are they not shooting themselves in their own feet (in a profit-making sense)?

After some thought, I began to realize that what is permitting this indifference to US workers’ declining worth and purchasing power, is the rise of new markets elsewhere (China, Southeast Asia, India, Brazil [South America in general), Eastern Europe)…each of which, although less wealthy, comparatively, than the US middle class (formerly the main consumer engine of the world), are also larger in population (total numbers and growth rates) with rising standards of living.

These markets represent a new, global consumer-driven market just waiting to be exploited.

Thus, a “volume model” is at work here…aided by the increasingly global (transnational) nature of corporate business. How long can this be sustained? How long will these new markets last before they reach an economic threshold?

…this is a guessing game…but, one can be sure that eventually, new markets will dry up (unless they can figure out a way to lift the standard of living of the entire African continent, which is not a bad thing, per se). But even that market (if it were to emerge) would top off eventually.

The main problem is, of course, that said “standard of living” is largely based on an American-European standard, which is carbon-heavy, wasteful and unsustainable.

Global business practice buys itself a bit more time, a few more decades perhaps…but the long-term sustainability of the current economic model (expansion into new markets to off-set declines in traditional markets) is untenable.

Do we want the world to enjoy better lives? Yes, of course. But we also don’t want the rest of the world to repeat the mistakes we have made (which they seem to be doing, more or less). There is a global climate crisis afoot (and a pending economic one) that will require global cooperation to solve.

This is THE challenge of the 21st century.

http://Web matt

I think the point is missed… look deeper and you will see ‘green’ investment by the energy companies… financially they are crashing the system and the same people will prop it back up with a green resource based market… the threads are already in place, they just need a global crash and crisis to get us all on board… nice little bait and switch-

http://importantmedia.org/members/zshahan/ Zachary Shahan

wow, what nonsense! These institutions’ green investments are very minor compared to the overall global market. and even if they weren’t, they aren’t crashing the economy! They have been proven time and time again to HELP the economy. The factors crashing the economy, if you haven’t been paying attention, are something completely different. Jeez, way to make a very thorough, scientific study seem useless in just a few sentences… NOT.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Here is a related issue:

The IMF controls much of the global carbon cap and trade market; money from this trading (about 1/3) is then invested in carbon-intensive industries…counter-productive (for climate control) to say the least.

Point being that even if said green investments are being made, if, simultaneously, investments are being made in (thus supporting) the same carbon-heavy industries (like mining), then this would seem to cancel out (or render neutral) much of the benefit of green investing.

Which is not to say that said green investing should be stopped!

Granted, from a capital point of view, it make sense to invest in some emerging/promising technologies/industries (green), while still maintaining capital investment in old, profitable ones (however heavily polluting).

But from the public good perspective, this is hypocritical and corrupt…and harmful in the long-term.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Matt

You are implying or stating that the energy corporations (which also invest in green tech) would intentionally “crash the system,” in order to (eventually) “prop it back up” only with green energy power sources?

This is a remarkable theory.

Putting aside the ethics of crashing a global financial system on purpose, it seems unlikely, with so many still addicted to oil (i.e., established infrastructure supporting it), that energy companies will crash the system
only to “bait and switch” dirty energy for clean.

Apart form the massive capital outlay required to do this, you seem to be implying a perverse altruism that, to date, is nowhere to be found in any energy corporation (TNC).

Further, energy corporation are often partly or largely controlled by larger entities, which have other investments besides energy.

But that gets complicated quickly.

In short, I just can’t see this scenario happening the way your describe it.

http://Web charles

It makes no sense as the green tech alternative is miniscule at current output.However the various population reduction conspiracy theories/2012 apocalyptical theories make it plausible.

http://Web Vassily K.

haha
you opened our eyes
suggest a better way. In details please like if it could work.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Vassily K.

Thanks for your comment.

I really don’t know, at this point, what “a better way” might be…the first step to a more equitable power distribution in the world (which in theory would make the global economy more stable) is to analyze said power networks/concentrations (as done in this analysis).

After that, it remains for observers to responsibly bring this information to the public…then, it is up to the people and the leadership (assuming they are not corrupted) to advocate, develop and enforce a more equitable, sane, balanced network of ownership…or, failing this, to develop a network wholly apart (globally, publicly owned) from this other, private one…such that the private network’s activities can be off-set (counter-balanced) in times of financial/economic trouble or crisis…

http://Web Nadia

my entire retirement savings in entities on the top 10 of this list….I guess I don’t have a problem with them being in control.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Nadia

Thanks for your honest comment.

Sure, during good economic times (robust growth) in which your top ten are making profits on a massive scale (some of which trickles down to you), I can see why you would be thankful. But that is merely self-interest (on a smaller scale, just like that of the entity/control network).

But you must remember the “systemic risk” that results from all this shared ownership. The consequences of this network, in terms of acting as a bloc during a crisis, can be disastrous for the global economy.

If you trust this network to act in everyone’s best interest during a crisis, then you self-interest in fine.

The above-listed link (‘A network centric counter-hegemonic strategy’) is for a a French-English (academic/political science) blog, offering a paper entitled: ‘Tracing and reconfiguring networks to build a political alternative’

The published abstract reads (in part):

“…this paper aims to highlight the potentially political dimension of network analysis, namely as defined in the social sciences, and of the notion of networks itself. It will be shown that a political project could, in this case, be built on the desire to know this reticular world better, but also to be able to act appropriately towards it.”

…and offers three steps for achieving this result.

http://www.facebook.com/jonah.berlin Name (required)

I’d love to read this, but at $34, it’s going to remain in the hands of a few.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

I believe (unless the status has changed), the link to arXiv.org provides a download link (free) to the complete paper…as I did not pay anything when I downloaded it prior to researching this post.

ADDENDUM: My mistake, you were referring to the linked to paper in the comment (the French paper), when I assumed you meant the original paper that I analyze in the original blog.

http://www.usuncutmn.blogspot.com Virginia Simson

I’d like to see the entire list and compare it to the ALEC list of 300 corporations ..

http://Web Michael R.

FYI to the reader:

ALEC (according to wikipedia.org):

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a conservative, non-profit 501(c)(3), lobbying organization, the membership of which consists of both state legislators and private sector policy advocates. Among other activities, the group provides a venue for its private sector members to assist its legislative members in developing model laws for state legislatures; it also serves as a networking tool among legislators, allowing them to research the handling of policy in other states.

Ms Simson:

Thanks for your comment.

As to your wonder, since this is a national network, I suspect that only a relative few members (of ALEC) will show up in this global network ‘core’ (as noted in the post; previous analyses of networks: national verses international/transnational, etc.)…

…but yes, it would still be interesting to see how these “smaller” national players connect up with the global TNC control holder network.

At a glance, one can pick out firms like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan, Societe Generale, BOA, etc…but remember too, that many of those bailed out were “counter parties” to the credit default swaps (insurance taken out against the bundled securities that they sold), who were also partially paid/reimbursed in this manner (enough to bankrupt AIG, the main insurer)…thus, they made money ‘coming and going’…even though there was not enough actual money (in all the banks in all the world) to pay out all the insurance that was taken out against these securities….

I suspect that the bail out was a “done deal” due to the (potential) threat of making massive insurance claims against the bundled securities; such a massive (tens of trillions of dollars) transfer of capital would have sucked the life out of the global economy had said counter parties demanded full pay outs from all their insured securities transactions.

http://Web Jon

Why has no one mentioned the financial Ponzi scheme. Fiat money? The Fed being a private bank. Transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper 1%. Agenda 21 to control our society. Your study is a waste of time. Some intellectual masturbation at best.
Crony capitalism, stealing resources from others & selling the American dream. This all turns to fascism and controlling populations. They did a good job of un educating the people.
In less than a generation we’ve become the sheeple.
Want a movie to understand it all. ” The Collapse” Michael Ruppert.

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Jon

Thanks for your comment.

First, it is not MY study.

Second, it is not a “waste of time” to publish it; it is one thing to insinuate (rant) about global financial systems and the control they have, but it is vastly more significant to actually be able to show in what manner this control is exerted, i..e, the “architecture” of said control.

This is what this analysis attempts to do. One can draw one’s own conclusions from it — even call it “obvious” , “intellectual masturbation”, or describe it as a “no shit Sherlocke” news item (as one blog does), but it is, at root, information (and a description) of a financial ownership/control network backed up by a large order of data

(I urge you to read the paper for yourself)…This analysis represents something which few, if any, have ever done before (vis avis TNCs).

Your mini rant has been repeated countless times before by others, but offers the reader, in reality, nothing to grasp on to — no “proof”, no data, no real analysis…plus, you insert obscure terms like “Agenda 21″ which are not defined (as terms in this analysis are) and ultimately defeat your argument because they come off as obscurantist and ideological. No movie — however well crafted — can explain “it all”, or make anyone “understand it all”.

In actuality, the fundamentals of what you are asserting are supported by this analysis, only with less ideological vitriol and arrogance.

Oh, and the Fed (Federal Reserve) is not a true private bank, it is a hybrid (supra-public-private) financial entity that sets the rates (interest rates) at which federal dollars are loaned out, amongst its principal duties; it has much power, but it is in fact obligated to provide and maintain certain macro-economic services and conditions.

One can argue for its reform, but one should first know what it is.

http://Web Sam Powrie

Michael R,
This was an intriguing analysis. Thankyou for the effort involved and the objective and clear presentation. Even an unschooled fool such as myself can see some of the implications…
Sam P.

http://gregforest.com Greg Forest

Michael, Thanks for a great look into the org chart of world economics. Very enlightening. My question to you is what evidence can you provide me that the FED is owned or controlled by any but the member banks and their officers. I know of no governmental or legislative oversight whatsoever regarding this institution. Am I incorrect?

http://www.chaosmosis.net Michael Ricciardi

Mr Forest

Thanks for your comment.

AS to the evidence you seek, I suppose that the only way to reveal this would be to identify the members of the FED and then discover what their financial holdings are. This would be tricky as FED members are not obligated to reveal their financial ties.

It would not surprise me to find numerous interconnections between members of the FED and this ‘super entity’, or perhaps the SCC (see article for definition). The FED is, after all, a powerful force in the the world’s financial system.

I am not anti FED. However, your point about oversight (of the FED) is a valid question. Members of the FED are elected amongst themselves (to my knowledge), but the FED chairman position is influenced by the political leadership (executive branch), though, I do wonder if this is simply a matter of the FED members telling the POTUS whom they wish to lead the FED, and the POTUS then simply rubber-stamping the forgone decision.

It is this lack of (discernible) oversight and responsibility (to the people), that fosters anti-FED conspiracy thinking. I think that it is in the FED’s best interest to become more transparent (perhaps even electing a number of citizen members) in its operations and decision-making procedures.

Back in the Greenspan (former FED chair) days, whenever someone would refer to the “most powerful person in the world” (meaning the president), I would often jokingly retort: “You mean Alan Greenspan?”

http://EnergyQuicksand.com Edward Kerr

The fed has three classes of “owners”. C class are local banks that have an FDIC logo. Completely transparent and anyone can research who they are. B class are the large regional banks, Philadelphia, Denver, San Francisco,etc. Again totally open.
A class can be almost anyone from wealthy individuals, corporations, foreign banks or governments and they are totally SECRET and you will never find out who they are.

Search the IM Network

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.

Planetsave is part of the Important Media network of blogs working to make the world a better, greener place.